Genocide in 1st Samuel 15:2-3

[Poisonshady313]

If God did order the Amalekite genocide, then God was wrong to do so.

Though I disagree with you, I respect your opinion.

Neither of us were there at the time... neither of us could see what the nation did or did not do to merit annihilation.

I trust the book that describes God as being merciful AND just, redeeming whole nations that might have otherwise been destroyed had they not repented of their ways, and destroying nations that were a constant evil.

I trust that such a being would have the authority and the good reason to give such an order

You don't.

I get that. The most we can do is tell you how we see it... even if you can't see it our way.

To me, to say ALL the Amalekites were evil and deserved to die is an unverifiable claim. Even to say God ordered the genocide is an unverifiable claim.

To you, that the genocide even happened at all is an unverifiable claim.

Even if the Amalekites attacked the Israelites how does that make it ok to kill all the infants and children too?

I believe Ringer answered that one in post #69 in this thread.

If all the men and women of a nation were found to merit execution... what would YOU do with the children?

 

[Autodidact]

If all the men and women of a nation were found to merit execution... what would YOU do with the children?

Adopt them. Duh. This is not rocket science.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I think this is more wishful thinking on the part of the Israelites putting words into God's mouth to Justify their atrocities. It could be claimed that this has been a long term tendency.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Adopt them. Duh. This is not rocket science.

Moses grew up in a nation that had oppressed and murdered his people... and if you've done your reading, you'll recall that it didn't work out so well for the Egyptians.

Kid grows up and finds out (if not in his childhood) that his real mommy and daddy, along with the rest of the people of his heritage were killed by Israel, and the resentment and hatred begins that turns into a violent revolt.

Now you have fighting within one's own family, setting brother at war against brother.

It wasn't bad enough that Israel had faced attacks from Amalek for centuries from the outside... now they should face it from the inside?

 

[Poisonshady313]

I think this is more wishful thinking on the part of the Israelites putting words into God's mouth to Justify their atrocities. It could be claimed that this has been a long term tendency.

Round and around we go. We've had this conversation... not with you... but earlier in the thread... if you don't believe the contents of the book, you have no basis for suggesting the destruction of Amalek at the hands of Israelites even took place.

 

[Autodidact]

Moses grew up in a nation that had oppressed and murdered his people... and if you've done your reading, you'll recall that it didn't work out so well for the Egyptians.

Kid grows up and finds out (if not in his childhood) that his real mommy and daddy, along with the rest of the people of his heritage were killed by Israel, and the resentment and hatred begins that turns into a violent revolt.

Now you have fighting within one's own family, setting brother at war against brother.

It wasn't bad enough that Israel had faced attacks from Amalek for centuries from the outside... now they should face it from the inside?

You're right. Just kill them. In fact, why do we even have adoption today? Just kill them all; that's the right thing to do.

Are you seriously trying to persuade me that mass infanticide and genocide were the most moral choices available to G-d? That's a pretty poor G-d you've got there. I think I'll stay atheist, where we don't have to slaughter babies, thanks.

 

[gwk230]

I thought the sons shouldn't be punished for the sins of the fathers. That only the sinners should be held accountable for their own sins, not their children. It was mentioned in the Exodus (or elsewhere) that children shouldn't have to pay for what their fathers did (though I don't remember where exactly).
But what happened in 1 Samuel 15 was the sins of the fathers, but that of their ancestors.
Apparently this is not true.

　
Yah does not care about flesh. Flesh is not what he is looking at. He is looking to who is going to obey him. The payment that is spoke of isn’t a payment of the punishment of the flesh but rather that of the lake of fire. One can still loose their fleshly life for what their ancestors did and still be righteous enough to gain eternal life. We are all here for one purpose and one purpose only and that is explained in Ecc 12:13.
　

The animals were also not kill, but used for sacrifices to the God, but Samuel rebuked Saul, and said it is better to obey God, then sacrifice animals to him.
Then if this is case (in regarding to obedience and sacrifice), then is Jesus' sacrifice is for naught?

　
Ummmm no. Saul was commanded to kill the animals as well but made an excuse as most men do today that do not take responsibility for their own actions. He was rebuked for his disobedience. It is better to obey than to sacrifice is true but the Torah states if we do not obey then we have an avenue for perpetuation which is animal sacrifice. Your argument that you offer that you say nullify’s sacrifice is null itself because it was not stated that one was not to sacrifice at that time but it was only stated that to obey was better. See if we always obeyed the Torah then there would be no need to sacrifice. If Saul had obeyed then there would not have been any need for his rebuke nor would Elohim had needed to replace him.
　

It makes me wonder just how illogical and vengefully cruel this god really is.

　
LOL, See no one seems to look at all the chances that he gives before he makes his judgments. When you was growing up, how many times did your father, if you had a father and if that father knew how to raise a child correctly, give you a chance before he tore your backside up? Well Yah is our father and he has given all many, many, many, many chances many times over and those that continue to disobey have their grace run out just as the grace period your own father, or even mother, gave unto you before they punished you.
　
It always cracks me up when I hear a mere mortal man as myself make such statements as the one who created all things as being “illogical”. That’s Big funny. One might agree when we see that he created you and I as well. Why would he do such a illogical thing as to create those like us? LOL. I mean really, why create something that is always opposing you and making light of you? No wonder he said how he regretted making man. Its o.k. though. Its all going to change eventually when his plan is fulfilled. And yes Yah is a vengeful El. He states as much as well as how he will suffer the generations after those that hate and disobey him in Ex 20:5 as well as Deu 5:9.

 

[Poisonshady313]

You're right. Just kill them. In fact, why do we even have adoption today? Just kill them all; that's the right thing to do.

This line of questioning is useless in regard to the conversation we're having.

How you can impose today's standards on nomadic desert tribes 3000 years ago is beyond me.

Especially considering that adopted children these days aren't the children of a whole nation that had just been wiped out.

Are you seriously trying to persuade me that mass infanticide and genocide were the most moral choices available to G-d?

Given the choices between killing them, allowing them to starve in the desert, or adopting them, thereby allowing for the destruction of the nation of Israel from within.... you certainly wouldn't advocate allowing them to starve in the desert, and allowing Israel to be destroyed from within by the very people who were slated for annihilation for trying to destroy Israel wouldn't make a whole lot of sense.

I think I'll stay atheist, where we don't have to slaughter babies, thanks.

You wouldn't have to slaughter anyone if you did believe in God.

 

[Poisonshady313]

　
See if we always obeyed the Torah then there would be no need to sacrifice.

That's not true. Your statement is based on the erroneous assumption that atonement was the only reason for sacrifice.

 

[gnostic]

He was rebuked for his disobedience.

Yes, I know.

It is better to obey than to sacrifice is true but the Torah states if we do not obey then we have an avenue for perpetuation which is animal sacrifice. Your argument that you offer that you say nullify’s sacrifice is null itself because it was not stated that one was not to sacrifice at that time but it was only stated that to obey was better.

Yes, I mentioned that Samuel said it was better to obey than offer sacrifice.

Saul is liable, as commander-in-chief, for what he and his men do.

My problem with the whole chapter is not whether Saul obeyed or disobeyed God's commandment, that God, through Samuel, would give commandment to kill women and children, and that not even infants were spared.

My other problem is with some Christians trying to whitewash the whole issues.

Some claimed, like keithnurse, would say that God didn't have anything to do with genocide, it was all author's doing, whoever he may be, trying to color the story - thus propaganda.

This could be true, but that's more speculation than anything else, because we don't have any other records, apart from 1st book of Samuel. In fact, we don't have any evidence whatsoever - of the battle and genocide taking place, other than what is written in the bible.

As I have pointed out to Keith, if God took no part in ordering the genocide taking place, then why was God punishing Saul, and anointed David shortly afterward to be the next king. Take the "god" out of the equation, then the whole story, not just the genocide of the Amalekites, but the whole book, wouldn't sense.

Then there is you.

Yah does not care about flesh. Flesh is not what he is looking at. He is looking to who is going to obey him. The payment that is spoke of isn’t a payment of the punishment of the flesh but rather that of the lake of fire. One can still loose their fleshly life for what their ancestors did and still be righteous enough to gain eternal life. We are all here for one purpose and one purpose only and that is explained in Ecc 12:13.

You bring the whole Christian doctrine of fire-and-brimstones punishment, when there were no such concept in early Judaism. Any divine punishment was mete out in this life, not the afterlife. There were no heaven-hell in early Judaism.

Only Second Temple Judaism, during the Hellenistic period and afterward, and the Christianity believed in there being hell. But even then, the Hellenistic Jews only believed in (such as can be found in the books of Enoch) hell as a place of eternal punishment for fallen angels, not eternal punishment for after life of deceased humans.

You are putting Christian scenario or interpretation on books written that have no such concepts. The Jewish concept of divine punishments are different to Christian version.

I agreed with autodidact that we can't impose today's standard to what happen back then. Nor can you impose Christian standard to what happened back then too.

Nevertheless, I don't think killing women and children can have any moral value or justification, no matter what period or culture we may live in, nor what this so-called may "god" may say....PERIOD!

 

[gnostic]

Are you seriously trying to persuade me that mass infanticide and genocide were the most moral choices available to G-d? That's a pretty poor G-d you've got there.

Agreed. It is cruel god that can only order killing of infants.

I think I'll stay atheist, where we don't have to slaughter babies, thanks.

Well, that's not likely to happen. I don't think you can become Jewish unless you have Jewish blood or you marry a Jewish man and accept Judaism.

The only avenues possibly open for you, is you becoming either Christian, or even Muslim, but you can't be accepted as a Jew, unless you already have Jewish ancestry.

 

[Fortunato]

You wouldn't have to slaughter anyone if you did believe in God.

But the Israelites did believe in God and he told them to slaughter the Amelikites. Seeing how God has ordered genocide once, he might do so again. Without knowing exactly what God's plans for the future are, you can't say that he won't. So the best you could say is, "You probably won't have to slaughter anyone if you believe in God."

 

[gwk230]

That's not true. Your statement is based on the erroneous assumption that atonement was the only reason for sacrifice.

You know I might have to agree with you on this one point.

 

[gwk230]

My problem with the whole chapter is not whether Saul obeyed or disobeyed God's commandment, that God, through Samuel, would give commandment to kill women and children, and that not even infants were spared.

　
Why? Why would you have a problem with the creator wanting to erase those that would not obey him and only wanted abominations? Yes the women are a part of it and the children would be brought up in it and doing the same things if not worse.
　

My other problem is with christians and keithnurse

　
That is between you and the christians and keithnurse.
　

Then there is you.
　
You bring the whole Christian doctrine of fire-and-brimstones punishment, when there were no such concept in early Judaism.

　
Well if the so called christians have the same understanding as the Sinaiticist in this issue then maybe there is some hope for them after all but I do not believe that it is really all that the same. Further I wonder why you think that just because your claim of early judaism doesn’t agree why that would make two tiddily winks to me? I do not follow judaism nor christianity. I am a Sinaiticist.
　

Nevertheless, I don't think killing women and children can have any moral value or justification, no matter what period or culture we may live in, nor what this so-called may "god" may say....PERIOD!

　
Oh then I must apologize. I didn’t realize this thread was about your thoughts and feelings. I only can go by what is written and thoughts and feelings that one may or may not have is irrelevant. No offence mind you. I am but a mere mortal man that thinks and feels but never thinks his thoughts or feelings are above his creator.

 

[Poisonshady313]

But the Israelites did believe in God and he told them to slaughter the Amelikites. Seeing how God has ordered genocide once, he might do so again. Without knowing exactly what God's plans for the future are, you can't say that he won't. So the best you could say is, "You probably won't have to slaughter anyone if you believe in God."

The order to destroy a nation could only come from God through a prophet... and prophecy ceased after Malachi... and won't resume again until the Messiah, about whom it is written

"He will judge among the nations, and will settle the arguments of many peoples. They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nations will not lift sword against nation and they will no longer study warfare."

So... I say definitively... you will not have to slaughter anyone if you believe in God.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Agreed. It is cruel god that can only order killing of infants.



Well, that's not likely to happen. I don't think you can become Jewish unless you have Jewish blood or you marry a Jewish man and accept Judaism.

The only avenues possibly open for you, is you becoming either Christian, or even Muslim, but you can't be accepted as a Jew, unless you already have Jewish ancestry.

Conversion to Judaism is possible.

Who told you otherwise?

 

[Autodidact]

Agreed. It is cruel god that can only order killing of infants.

Well, that's not likely to happen. I don't think you can become Jewish unless you have Jewish blood or you marry a Jewish man and accept Judaism.

The only avenues possibly open for you, is you becoming either Christian, or even Muslim, but you can't be accepted as a Jew, unless you already have Jewish ancestry.

I'm Jewish. And it is possible, although difficult, to convert to Judaism.

 

[Fortunato]

The order to destroy a nation could only come from God through a prophet...

Oh, I apologize. I didn't know that only a prophet of god could order genocide. I'm not very good with remembering verses from the Hebrew Bible. Do you happen to know which verse this was?

 

[Poisonshady313]

Oh, I apologize. I didn't know that only a prophet of god could order genocide. I'm not very good with remembering verses from the Hebrew Bible. Do you happen to know which verse this was?

Only God could order a genocide... and the definition of a prophet is a mouthpiece for God. Doesn't require a scriptural verse... it's common sense.

 

[Autodidact]

Only God could order a genocide... and the definition of a prophet is a mouthpiece for God. Doesn't require a scriptural verse... it's common sense.

God can order genocide--but only through a prophet--and that's...wait for it...common sense!!! :biglaugh: